Classification of all things

  • Thread starter Avichal
  • Start date
291
0
Is there a classification of all things? This question actually arises from the 20 Q game. If things are categorized and arranged as a tree, it would be very easy.
I don't think there exist such a categorization (who has the time!) but still is it possible?

You could start with natural and human-made things and then go on further.
 
543
10
consult set theory
 
129
13
Of course everything can be put into classes.......I if something is discovered that doesn't fit, we just make a new class for it!
 
291
0
consult set theory
I don't understand how set theory is related to my question.
Of course everything can be put into classes.......I if something is discovered that doesn't fit, we just make a new class for it!
Yes of course. I was looking if it is possible to intuitively list out all the categories.
Something like this - Well, we need food, shelter, things for our comfort. Now food can be plants or animals .... and so on.
 

collinsmark

Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,849
1,171
Is there a classification of all things? This question actually arises from the 20 Q game. If things are categorized and arranged as a tree, it would be very easy.
I don't think there exist such a categorization (who has the time!) but still is it possible?

You could start with natural and human-made things and then go on further.
There are many taxonomies, or taxonomic schemes that have been created for things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_%28general%29

But no practical taxonomy explicitly contains everything. I suppose it would be like trying to draw every detail of a fractal. And you can count on some things being more ambiguous to classify than others, for any given taxonomic scheme. I imagine cultural difference, language semantics and connotations complicate the process. (It doesn't keep people from trying though).
 
291
0
There are many taxonomies, or taxonomic schemes that have been created for things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomy_%28general%29

But no practical taxonomy explicitly contains everything. I suppose it would be like trying to draw every detail of a fractal. And you can count on some things being more ambiguous to classify than others, for any given taxonomic scheme. I imagine cultural difference, language semantics and connotations complicate the process. (It doesn't keep people from trying though).
I love when things are systematic like the way we have classified each fundamental particle, elements etc.
But I suppose there are just too many things, too many combinations to systematically categorize everything.

Thank You anyways!
 

CompuChip

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
4,284
47
I think in the 20Q thread there was also a link to an online version. If you have played it you will already have noticed some ambiguities.
For example, I was thinking of the sun, and then it asks questions like "is it shiny", "is it used for entertainment" to which I don't really know the answer. And I answered "Yes" to "Can it be painted" while apparently it thinks not. In that case, I guess you will have answered your own question.
 
646
307
I think its possible, but rather than a tree it would form a web, where single node can have many connections.
 

Related Threads for: Classification of all things

  • Last Post
3
Replies
61
Views
9K
  • Last Post
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
334
Replies
32
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Top